Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Oct 26, 2011 5:07am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

@bilbarstad: The renewal window is just one year.

"The renewal had to occur during the calendar year following the year of the 27th anniversary of the start date of the first term".

So for this to be valid, it should have been registered before February 24,1966. This looks to be one day late.

If the year in the notice does not correspond to the year in the registration, then the January 1 - December 31 calendar year might apply, but not if the notice says 1938

This post was modified by HektorT on 2011-10-26 12:07:10

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Oct 26, 2011 7:31am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

If I understand correctly, you're saying that renewal isn't based on the year in notice alone, but on the full date on the original registration when the years coincide. I've just been using the recipe Video-Cellar posted here in judging validity of renewals.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Oct 27, 2011 10:42am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

@billbarstad: Yes, the renewal window is during the 27th year after the registration, beginning on the 27th anniversary of the initial registration. So if it is one year then it would end one day before the 28th anniversary. VideoCellar's text also says anniversary.

I'm not sure what the exact dates are in the case of the notice predating the registration

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Oct 27, 2011 10:49am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

Yeah. I was stuck on the whole "in notice' idea.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Oct 27, 2011 12:08pm
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

Copyrightdata.com doesn't quite agree with you (see attachment), but I've never thought much of that site anyway.

Attachment: Copyright_Renewal_Windows.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Oct 29, 2011 4:35am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

@bilbarstad:

For the film in question, since it is © 24Feb38

The pre-1950 rule applies, to copyrightdata does agree (i like that site a lot!).

I think it was videocellar's post that is confusing as it refers to year in notice. Maybe he is trying to say that in the case that the notice year is active (like when the notice predates actual registration), then the calendar year is valid.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Oct 29, 2011 5:56am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

According to their chart, the start date for the renewal period is 24-Feb-65 and the end date is 24-Feb-66. So the movie wouldn't be PD, since it was renewed on the last day of the renewal window.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: HektorT Date: Oct 29, 2011 7:17am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

Oh, didn't understand what you were saying. OK, I would agree with that then. I always go with what they say on that site as my most reliable authority.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: billbarstad Date: Oct 29, 2011 8:06am
Forum: feature_films Subject: Re: renewal question

What you wrote initially made more sense to me in that the renewal period would be 365 days, or 1 year. The chart also ignores the requirements of the transitional year 1950 as well as the case where the year in notice is different than the year of registration. Oh well, I hope copyrightdata.com is right, at least in what in does cover.

This post was modified by billbarstad on 2011-10-29 15:06:31